Henric

“Il faut cultiver notre jardin”

[Henric @HenricCont]

No matter what MMT tries to claim the real tax is paid when gov spends, by transfer of goods and service from private to public.

The rest is just funding.

If gov issue money and the money gets its value from taxation then its the tax payer.
If the issue more, then devaluation.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@t_chieftan @MMTUK_PRG As I said they used many forms of money.

To make exchange more convenient.

More importantly, people seeking work are defined as unemployed in economics but not in MMT.

[Henric @HenricCont]

A job that fulfilled their needs.

Of course people can choose to run their own business or farm but most don’t and prefer to seek work for others.

There has been many forms of money, from Barley and silver to gold.

They exchange goods and services for other goods and services.

People who do exchange decides what to accept.

Changing definitions so people seeking work are not unemployed tells us a lot about MMT.

[Creative Deduction @CreativeDeduct]

@Handre A powerful rebuttal to the MMT claim that money originates exclusively from - and must be spent into the economy by - government.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@t_chieftan @MMTUK_PRG The rest of us call people seeking work for unemployed!

In no way do we call them “subsistence lifestyle” and why would they have to work every working hour if they found good job?

Better stick to the correct definition and skip the MMT nonsense.

[Henric @HenricCont]

The implications of changing definitions so they no longer mean the same thing?

What would you call someone looking for work before the Hut Tax in MMT’s example?

According to MMT they were not unemployed, because they were not yet seeking the state’s currency. According to virtually every conventional definition, however, they were unemployed: able to work, willing to work, and without a job.

If the same person becomes “unemployed” the moment a tax is imposed, then what changed—the person’s situation, or merely the definition?

[Robin Faustino-Stirling @Glazertwalker]

@Ye_Olde_Holborn MMT advovates are the same class of people who were selling sub-prime mortgages 20 years ago and saying it was prime debt.
Just a bigger scam this time round.

[MattBrookes @MattBrookes3]

@Ye_Olde_Holborn Mmt people are like sovereign citizens. Convinced they’ve found a clever loophole which allows them to do as they like without consequences, and if you suggest there might be consequences they get angry and call you stupid.

[Ye Olde Holborn☣️ @Ye_Olde_Holborn]

>>>MMT is for 2 types of people
Type 1 The academic grifters who make a good living peddling MMT bullshit
Type 2 The malcontented loser who believes that their pitiful existence would be better if only the state clandestinely stole more wealth from its citizens
You are Type 2

[Henric @HenricCont]

@t_chieftan @MMTUK_PRG It does help to have same definition on the basics.

And MMTs new definition has absurd implications

[Henric @HenricCont]

@t_chieftan @MMTUK_PRG Still, MMT changed the definition to fit its agenda.

It all goes back to MMTs infamous Hut tax economy.

For the rest of economics it’s a different story.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@t_chieftan @MMTUK_PRG Hahaha yeah

That is MMTs definition indeed.

MMT has a thing with changing definitions.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@HenryGustav4 @misterp55 ?

[Henric @HenricCont]

@HenryGustav4 @misterp55 Me people prefer to have 1000 today rather than getting it in 10 years.

Prices are set by supply and demand.

If you don’t like to pay interest then don’t issue more claims than you receive.

Most savings is in real assets such as real estate, stocks, commodities etc

[Henric @HenricCont]

@jemmm85517813 @conspiracyb0t It was completely ice free only 3m years ago and almost ice free several periods after.

https://t.co/fNK11j0tI0

[Henric @HenricCont]

@t_chieftan @MMTUK_PRG MMT has their own definition of unemployment that is different from rest of economics.

Real unemployment is people seeking work but can’t find it on the terms they prefer. So they either have to change what terms they can accept or change their circumstances.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@t_chieftan @MMTUK_PRG Not at all

[Henric @HenricCont]

@barua_82 @StephanieKelton Issuing more and more Post It for same goods and services makes zero sense.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@HenryGustav4 @misterp55 The price of time is not zero.

And they already reduced the debt so interest is already small.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@HenryGustav4 @misterp55 They could do like welfare countries and reduce debt, then less interest to pay.

[Henric @HenricCont]

@HenryGustav4 @misterp55 More and more claims for the same goods and services does have consequences.